Sunday, January 31, 2010


From yesterday's Los Angeles Daily News:

Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich [taking issue with the budget-cutting early release of prison inmates] cited a Harvard University study that found that releasing criminals costs more in the long run as they commit additional crimes and are rearrested, retried and re-sentenced.

The study found that for each criminal locked up, there is a reduction of between five and six reported crimes.

"Putting criminals back into our communities is an irresponsible and reckless way to balance the state's budget," Antonovich said.

Friday, January 29, 2010


My blog, “Maxine Waters, The Female Al Sharpton” (1-12-10), concerned Waters wanting the federal courts to oversee the Inglewood Police Department because its officers have killed some of her constituents. Now some civil rights groups within the Greater Houston Coalition for Justice - LULAC, NAACP, American GI Forum, American Rights Association - want the U.S. Justice Department to investigate an increase in the number of shootings by police. Many of those shot were blacks and Latinos.

“In the history of the Houston [Police] Department, which is 130 years, never, ever have we ever suffered so much in the community in terms of police brutality and the number of people getting killed,“ said Sylvia Gonzales, vice president of LULAC. WHAT AN INFLAMMATORY PILE OF CRAP! The exact opposite is true. Despite the city’s annual population growth, incidents of alleged brutality have decreased over the years due to the emphasis in training against using excessive force.

NAACP representative Fred Cooper said the shooting upswing has caused questions in the [black] community, including what HPD is doing to determine whether officers could have employed other options before using deadly force. Fair enough. But only morons will say: Wrestle with him or shoot it [the weapon] out of his hand, but if you have to shoot him, shoot him only in the arm or leg. Reasonable persons will say: If he points a gun at you, or comes at you with a knife, shoot first and SHOOT TO KILL.

In 2009, Houston police officers, Harris County officers and cops from cities within the county were involved in 60 shootings, killing 27 people, some of whom were unarmed. Houston officers killed 15 in 29 shootings. Those numbers do not appear to be excessive considering the fact that the population of Harris County is more than 4,000,000.

Much has been made of when officers shot a man pointing a hairbrush at them in one case and a toy gun in another. In the dark or at a distance, a hairbrush can easily be mistaken for a gun. And what about a toy gun? Is an officer supposed to wait and get shot before determining whether a gun is a toy or real? Today’s real guns come in different colors - camo, pink, white, speckled white – to attract a certain clientele, thus making it hard to tell the difference between the real thing and a toy.

I firmly believe that over 90 percent of all police shootings are righteous, whether the person getting shot was armed or not. In the questionable shootings (less than 10 percent), non-lethal force might have been an option. However, in those instances where an officer experiences a moment of panic, the instinct to survive – fight or flight – will kick in and that would make him resort to deadly force.

Maxine Waters and the Houston civil rights activists should place themselves in a police officers boots. It’s scary out there, especially in minority neighborhoods with their high violent crime rates. To an officer in imminent fear of his life, a Tazer or other non-lethal weapon will not be the weapon of choice. Cops have a saying: IT’S BETTER TO BE JUDGED BY TWELVE THAN TO BE CARRIED BY SIX. That makes damn good sense!

Instead of piling on the police, civil rights activists would better serve the public if they were to apply their time and energy in attempting to reduce the violence so readily resorted to by members of the black and Latino communities.


by Michelle Malkin
January 29, 2010

Imagine this nightmare courtroom scenario: Unhinged Jew-bashing, open mockery of American soldiers, juror intimidation and coldly calculated exploitation of U.S. constitutional protections by a suspected al-Qaida defendant. Well, there’s no need to wait for the Gitmo terror trial circuses. New York City is already getting a glimpse of the future.

Jihadi scientist Aafia Siddiqui is on trial right now in a federal Manhattan court for the attempted murder and assault of U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan’s Ghazni province two years ago. She’s an accomplished Karachi-born scientist who studied microbiology at MIT and did graduate work in neurology at Brandeis University before disappearing in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Counterterrorism investigators connected Siddiqui and her estranged husband, anesthesiologist Dr. Mohammed Amjad Khan, to Saudi terror funders. The couple’s bank account showed repeated purchases of high-tech military equipment and apparel, including body armor, night-vision goggles and military manuals. Her second husband, fellow al-Qaida suspect and 9/11 plot helper Ammar al-Baluchi, is one of five Gitmo detainees the Obama administration is planning to transfer to New York for trial.

Siddiqui was identified as an al-Qaida operative, financier and fixer by no less than 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed during U.S. interrogations. Al-Baluchi is KSM’s nephew. Mohammed reportedly enlisted Siddiqui in a Baltimore-based plot to bomb gas stations, fuel tanks and bridges, and to poison water reservoirs in the greater Washington, D.C., area. Siddiqui was taken into custody in Ghazni in July 2008 after attempting to shoot U.S. military interrogators and FBI agents.

Now, the savvy “Terror Mom” of three is pulling out all the stops to win a mistrial. Among her Cirque du Jihad antics:

-- Demanding that jurors be genetically tested for a “Zionist or Israeli background” to ensure a fair and impartial jury of her Jew-hating peers.

-- Ranting about 9/11 Israel conspiracies during voir dire.

-- Screaming out loud during the testimony of U.S. Army Capt. Robert Snyder, who was in the room in Ghazni when Siddiqui allegedly grabbed an M-4 rifle and proclaimed, “Allahu Akbar!” and “I hate Americans! Death to America!” Before being ejected from the courtroom, Siddiqui shouted to Snyder, “You’re lying!” She also babbled about torture at a secret prison.

-- Blurting out “I feel sorry for you” to the witness in front of the jury before being led out of the courtroom again.

Siddiqui’s defense team, funded in part by the Pakistani government, asserts that Lady al-Qaida is so mentally ga-ga that she should not be allowed to take the witness stand. Bleeding-heart human-rights groups have dutifully rallied around Siddiqui. She’s Mumia Abu-Jamal in a burqa. Indeed, her supporters have launched their own “Free Aafia” campaign. But two government-retained psychiatrists, working independently, determined last year that Siddiqui’s so-called symptoms of mental illness were attributed to “malingering” and “manipulation.” The judge in the case concluded that she is competent and understands full well the charges against her.

The Crazy Jihadi tactic is in perfect sync with the al-Qaida training manual advising its operatives to claim victimhood status if arrested and put on trial. This act is also in keeping with a long tradition of terror defendants invoking the insanity card -- from “20th hijacker” Zacarias Moussaoui (whose lawyers chalked up his mass-murdering ambitions to a traumatic childhood) to Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan (whose defense will undoubtedly play up his lonely bachelorhood).

To make matters worse, the New York Post reported this week that an “unidentified man in a white headdress” mouthed an obscenity at the Siddiqui trial and cocked his finger like a gun at two jurors. The jurors were let go; it remains unclear whether the thug in white headdress will be charged and what relation, if any, he has to Siddiqui.

Would you answer a jury summons knowing you could end up sitting in front of a jihadi sympathizer on the loose who is mentally painting a target on your forehead? And would you trust the White House ringmasters and Justice Department terror-coddlers to protect you from harm?

These suspects belong in controlled military tribunals, not federal courtrooms that are being turned into al-Qaida P.R. platforms. The O.J. Simpson spectacle of a smirking murder suspect, preening defense attorneys, a showboating judge and the judicial process run amok on cable TV 24/7 was bad enough. The 1993 World Trade Center bombing trial, which gave the bin Laden network a multimillion-dollar tax-subsidized legal team, free translation services, personal dry-cleaning services, race-baiting defense witnesses and access to information that was allegedly used by jihadists to evade surveillance, was even worse.

The specter of 10, 15, 20 Siddiqui-style courtroom carnivals -- at a cost of at least $1 billion to taxpayers -- threatens to throw our civilian court system into complete chaos. America can’t afford to clown around with national security.


It's late fall and the Indians on a remote reservation in South Dakota asked their new chief if the coming winter was going to be cold or mild.

Since he was a chief in a modern society, he had never been taught the old secrets. When he looked at the sky, he couldn't tell what the winter was going to be like. Nevertheless, to be on the safe side, he told his tribe that the winter was indeed going to be cold and that the members of the village should collect firewood to be prepared.

But, being a practical leader, after several days, he got an idea. He went to the phone booth, called the National Weather Service, and asked, "Is the coming winter going to be cold?"

"It looks like this winter is going to be quite cold,'" the meteorologist at the weather service responded.

So the chief went back to his people and told them to collect even more firewood in order to be prepared.

A week later, he called the National Weather Service again.

"'Does it still look like it is going to be a very cold winter?"

"Yes," the man at National Weather Service again replied, "it's going to be a very cold winter."

The chief again went back to his people and ordered them to collect every scrap of firewood they could find.

Two weeks later, the chief called the National Weather Service once again.

"Are you absolutely sure that the winter is going to be very cold?"

"Absolutely,' the man replied. "it's looking more and more like it is going to be one of the coldest winters we've ever seen."

"How can you be so sure?" the chief asked.

The weatherman replied, "Because the Indians are collecting a shitload of firewood."

Thursday, January 28, 2010


Gregory Powell kidnapped and killed an L.AQ. officer in ’63

Associated Press
January 28, 2010

LOS ANGELES — A convicted killer was denied parole Wednesday 47 years after he and a partner kidnapped two Los Angeles police officers and shot one to death in a case made famous by the book and movie "The Onion Field."

A California Board of Prison Terms panel found the 76-year-old Gregory Powell unsuitable for parole after a hearing at the California Men's Colony at San Luis Obispo. It was his 11th parole hearing.

Deputy District Attorney Alexis De la Garza, who spoke to The Associated Press after the hearing, said the denial's duration would be for three years.

De la Garza said that Powell told board commissioners John Peck and Randy Kevorkian that he has terminal prostate cancer and would like to be released before he dies.

"I've done enough time. I'm a different man and I'm ready to be paroled," De la Garza quoted Powelll as saying.

However, she said the commissioners pointed out that during his nearly half century in prison he has taken no steps to participate in self help, educational or vocational programs.

De la Garza argued that the heinousness of the crime made him unsuitable for parole.

"It was a cold, deliberate crime," she said, "and he had a long time to reflect on it."

The crime was chronicled in Joseph Wambaugh's best-selling book, "The Onion Field."

De la Garza recounted that Powell and co-defendant, Jimmy Lee Smith, kidnapped Officer Ian Campbell and his partner, Karl Hettinger, on a March night in 1963 in Hollywood after they were pulled over in a routine traffic stop. They drove north to a Bakersfield onion field where Campbell was shot five hours later but Hettinger escaped.

Hettinger had been forced to give up his gun but escaped by running into the onion field. He was haunted by that night for the rest of his life, was shunned by his colleagues, and died in 1994 at the age of 59.

Powell and Smith were sentenced to death but their sentences were commuted to life in prison after the death penalty was briefly outlawed in the 1970s.

[Smith was initially released in 1982, but returned to prison several times on drug-related parole violations. In December 2006, he failed to report to his parole agent and a warrant was issued for his arrest. He was caught in February 2007 and charged with violating his parole. On April 7, 2007, he died of an apparent heart attack while in custody at the Pitchess Detention Center in Castaic. He was 76.]


The left, member states of the European Union and the Muslim World accuse Israel of responding disproportionately to aggression from Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. None of them have praised Israel’s disproportionate response to Haiti’s earthquake.

Bill Clinton and a few American correspondents have given recognition to the life-saving procedures Haitians received at the Israel Defense Force’s field hospital which set up shop within a couple of days after the disaster.

by Gil Ronen
January 28, 2010

The IDF's rescue operation in Haiti received praise Thursday from former US president Bill Clinton, who is the UN Secretary General's Special Emissary to the Caribbean disaster zone.

Clinton mentioned the hospital at a round table session on philanthropy held Thursday at the International Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, in which Israeli President Shimon Peres was also a member of the panel.

Addressing Peres as the audience looked on, Clinton said: “Shimon, I don't know what we would have done without the Israeli hospital at Haiti. The Israeli hospital was the only operational facility which was able to perform surgery and advanced tests.”

Clinton added that “in the name of the aid workers that operated in Haiti, in the name of the people who live there, and on a personal level I want to thank, we all want to thank, Israel from the bottom of our hearts.”

Peres responded by saying that “Israel will be happy to offer all of its abilities in assisting the rehabilitation of the island.”


From time to time I am going to post some examples of inmates who were classified as low-risk or non-violent offenders before they were released from prison. Here is the first example:

By Bob Walsh

PacoVilla Corrections blog
January 27,2010

Charles Samuel, 50, was today held over to stand trial in the murder of Lily Burk.

Unless you have been living under a rock [in Califonria] for the last several months you will remember that Lily Burk was 17-years old when she was murdered, allegedly by Charles Samuel, a parolee living in an "in-custody drug treatment facility" operated by a private contractor in the LA area. The girls cell phone and car keys were found on Samuel when he was arrested for drinking in public by the LAPD. He had a significant amount of blood spatter on him, but there was not, at that time, a crime to tie him to. The parole division was at first very unhelpful about placing a parole hold on good old Charlie. Fortunately the cops knew of a parole agent who didn't have his head up his butt and they managed to keep Samuel in custody until they could figure out what was going on.

Lily Burk, who was 5-2 and weight about 100 pounds, had numerous injuries all over her body, including the bottom of her feet and bite marks on her face. It is likely she was killed by being stabbed in the neck with a broken beer bottle.

Samuel has been charged with kidnapping and murder. Even if convicted he will almost certainly die of old age in prison rather than be executed, all the time sucking up taxpayers money and getting Cadillac health care and other delivery of quality services. Makes you proud to be a taxpayer, doesn't it?

Wednesday, January 27, 2010


by La Shawn Barber
January 28, 2010

One idea that transcends political lines is that blacks are inferior and should be held to lower standards in perpetuity.

In 2007, the Department of Justice (DOJ) under George W. Bush filed suit against the New York City Fire Department (FDNY) for violating the Civil Rights Act. The Vulcan Society, a fraternal organization of black firefighters, joined the lawsuit. Did the department hire and fire based on race? Did it deny promotions based on race? No. The department requires all candidates seeking employment, regardless of race, to take an exam that assesses "reading comprehension, problem solving, spatial recognition and applying rules to general concepts." For reasons that will be discussed and debated until the end of time, blacks as a group don't score as well as whites on such tests.

Last summer, a federal judge ruled that FDNY discriminated against blacks and Hispanics with an exam used in 1999 and 2002. Two weeks ago, the same judge ruled that New York City intentionally discriminated against minorities by continuing to use the exam.

Earlier this month, Barack Obama's DOJ filed suit against New Jersey and its Civil Service Commission for using an exam that "discriminates" against blacks and Hispanics, because these groups scored "statistically significantly lower" than whites.

"This complaint should send a clear message to all public employers that employment practices with unlawful discriminatory impact on account of race or national origin will not be tolerated," Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez told The Star-Ledger. "The Justice Department will take all necessary action to ensure that such discriminatory practices are eliminated and that the victims of such practices are made whole."

As head of DOJ's Civil Rights Division, Perez is only getting started. He's promised to bring more disparate impact lawsuits. In December, he told a left-leaning audience at the leftist American Constitution Society (oh, the irony!) that his department has "dusted off the disparate impact theory. If the fact support the use of disparate impact theory, whether it’s in the housing context, the voting context, the employment context, we will use the disparate impact theory because every court that has ruled on this has said that it is permissible to do so."

The disparate impact theory of liability was articulated in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971). The Supreme Court held that for purposes of hiring, an employer's use of a high school diploma requirement and aptitude tests violated the Civil Rights Act. Black applicants disproportionately lacked diplomas and/or scored low on the tests. Under the disparate impact analysis, discrimination need not be intentional. Even if an employment practice is "facially neutral," it's suspect if it has an adverse impact on members of a protected class. To avoid liability, businesses would have to demonstrate that such tests are a business necessity or related to job performance.

Racial minorities, especially blacks, should feel highly insulted by the entrenched assumption that they should not be expected to compete against whites on pencil-and-paper multiple choice civil service tests. Not only should they speak out against such condescending assumptions, they should refuse any and all special treatment, and demand to be treated as capable and responsible individuals. Such attitudes may be the impetus needed to put an end to these ridiculous and embarrassing lawsuits.

Remember the whole point of the civil rights movement: to be treated equally as individuals by the government, without regard to race. Every lawsuit and complaint that cites "disparate impact" confirms that our government believes blacks and other preferred minorities should be held to lower standards in perpetuity.


54 members of the House of Representatives, ALL DEMOCRATS, sent a letter to President Obama last week calling on him to pressure Israel into dropping its blockade of the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip.

The letter was written by House members Jim McDermott of Washington and Keith Ellison of Minnesota. It was spearheaded by McDermott and Ellison, as well as by Betty McCollum and Jim Oberstar, both of Minnesota.

Ellison, the first Muslim to be elected to Congress, had earlier lashed out at his fellow representatives for voting against the UN's Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of committing war crimes during last year's military response to ongoing Hamas rocket fire. McCollum has been a harsh critic and foe of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

One of the signers, James Moran of Virginia has long blamed Jews for starting wars. Several left-wing groups pushed the letter, including J Street, the Jewish anti-AIPAC lobby, and Americans for Peace Now.

Here is the full text of the letter:

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama,

Thank you for your ongoing work to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and for your commitment of $300 million in U.S. aid to rebuild the Gaza Strip. We write to you with great concern about the ongoing crisis in Gaza.

The people of Gaza have suffered enormously since the blockade imposed by Israel and Egypt following Hamas’ coup, and particularly following Operation Cast Lead. We also sympathize deeply with the people of southern Israel who have suffered from abhorrent rocket and mortar attacks. We recognize that the Israeli government has imposed restrictions on Gaza out of a legitimate and keenly felt fear of continued terrorist action by Hamas and other militant groups. This concern must be addressed without resulting in the de facto collective punishment of the Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip. Truly, fulfilling the needs of civilians in Israel and Gaza are mutually reinforcing goals.

The unabated suffering of Gazan civilians highlights the urgency of reaching a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and we ask you to press for immediate relief for the citizens of Gaza as an urgent component of your broader Middle East peace efforts. The current blockade has severely impeded the ability of aid agencies to do their work to relieve suffering, and we ask that you advocate for immediate improvements for Gaza in the following areas:

 Movement of people, especially students, the ill, aid workers, journalists, and those with family concerns, into and out of Gaza;

 Access to clean water, including water infrastructure materials,

 Access to plentiful and varied food and agricultural materials;

 Access to medicine and health care products and suppliers;

 Access to sanitation supplies, including sanitation infrastructure materials;

 Access to construction materials for repairs and rebuilding;

 Access to fuel;

 Access to spare parts;

 Prompt passage into and out of Gaza for commercial and agricultural goods; and

 Publication and review of the list of items prohibited to the people of Gaza.

Winter is arriving and the needs of the people grow ever more pressing. For example, the ban on building materials is preventing the reconstruction of thousands of innocent families’ damaged homes. There is also a concern that unrepaired sewage treatment plants will overflow and damage surrounding property and water resources.

Despite ad hoc easing of the blockade, there has been no significant improvement in the quantity and scope of goods allowed into Gaza. Both the number of trucks entering Gaza per month and the number of days the crossings have been open have declined since March. This crisis has devastated livelihoods, entrenched a poverty rate of over 70%, increased dependence on erratic international aid, allowed the deterioration of public infrastructure, and led to the marked decline of the accessibility of essential services.

The humanitarian and political consequences of a continued near-blockade would be disastrous. Easing the blockade on Gaza will not only improve the conditions on the ground for Gaza’s civilian population, but will also undermine the tunnel economy which has strengthened Hamas. Under current conditions, our aid remains little more than an unrealized pledge. Most importantly, lifting these restrictions will give civilians in Gaza a tangible sense that diplomacy can be an effective tool for bettering their conditions.

Your Administration’s overarching Middle East peace efforts will benefit Israel, the Palestinians, and the entire region. The people of Gaza, along with all the peoples of the region, must see that the United States is dedicated to addressing the legitimate security needs of the State of Israel and to ensuring that the legitimate needs of the Palestinian population are met.


Members of Congress

Raul Grijalva

Lois Capps
Sam Farr
Bob Filner
Barbara Lee
Loretta Sanchez
Pete Stark
Michael Honda
Lynn Woolsey
Jackie Speier
Diane Watson
George Miller

Jim Himes

Andre Carson

Bruce Braley

John Yarmuth

Elijah Cummings
Donna Edwards

Michael Capuano
William Delahunt
Jim McGovern
John Tierney
John Olver
Stephen Lynch

John Conyers
John Dingell
Carolyn Kilpatrick

Keith Ellison
Betty McCollum
James Oberstar

New Jersey
Donald Payne
Rush Holt
Bill Pascrell

New York
Yvette Clarke
Maurice Hinchey
Paul Tonko
Eric Massa

North Carolina
David Price

Mary Jo Kilroy
Marcy Kaptur

Earl Blumenauer
Peter DeFazio

Chaka Fattah
Joe Sestak

Peter Welch

Jim Moran
Glenn Nye

Jim McDermott
Adam Smith
Jay Inslee
Brian Baird

West Virginia
Nick Rahall

Tammy Baldwin
Gwen Moore

Tuesday, January 26, 2010


You are going to roll your eyes in disbelief when you read the following Galveston County Daily News report. A school board member with a Ph.D., at best an educated idiot, gave a speech to middle school students which turned into a description of how to perform oral and anal sex. Worse yet, school officials tried to keep her scandalous behavior secret.

We are going to hell, not because some educated idiot inappropriately ran her moth off, but because idiots, educated or not, keep electing a bunch of sorry candidates like her to public office.

Some years back the voters of a neighboring school district elected a real blockhead to their school board. He had been a cop who got fired for evading police officers from several departments during a long car chase, a chase which started when another cop caught him parked while screwing a woman, not his wife. Before he got fired, he had made more drug possession busts than any other cop in Galveston County, but his cases did not hold up because he lacked probable cause. This sorry excuse for a human being had a limited vocabulary – he spoke the “f” word almost every other sentence. Amazingly though, after he got fired the voters elected him to oversee the education of their children.

By T.J. Aulds

The Galveston County Daily News
January 23, 2010

HITCHCOCK — What was supposed to be a motivation speech to a collection of sixth- through eighth-grade girls at Crosby Middle School instead turned into an explicit sex talk, including descriptions on how to perform oral and anal sex, Hitchcock school officials said.

The motivational speaker turned out to be a Hitchcock school board member, Shirley Price.

Hitchcock Superintendent Mike Bergman said the Jan. 15 pep talk was supposed to be a motivational speech.

Price, who was born with physical handicaps, still managed to earn a doctoral degree and also won a seat on the school board.

Bergman said when Price was introduced, she asked that the school’s principal leave the room. Most of the teachers remained, but they did not step in when Price’s speech turned inappropriate, Bergman said.

“Somehow she got some story that she heard that students were having sex on campus and went into a speech about sexual type things,” Bergman said. “There was no motivational speech at all.”

The speech reportedly turned graphic and included instructions on how to perform oral and anal sex and included several curse words, Bergman said.

Students apparently were told to keep the contents of the speech secret, Bergman said.

Attempts to reach Price, who does not have a working listed land line phone and whose mobile phone answered with a generic “not available” recording, were unsuccessful.

The district has been flooded with calls from outraged parents who were unaware of the presentation until a couple of parents spoke at Tuesday’s school board meeting.

After that meeting, Price apologized and met one-on-one with some of the parents, Bergman said.

The district did not inform parents of the presentation until a letter was sent home with students Friday.

The letter, which does not name Price, said that a school trustee’s speech was “off-target and objectionable.”

“The topic discussed was not the agreed upon topic,” the letter says.

Bergman’s letter said the controversy would be a topic for discussion at the next regular school board meeting.

Meanwhile, the district tightened its policies on presentations to students. It now requires the school principal to be present for all presentations.

Teachers also would be given more leeway to interrupt a presentation deemed inappropriate, no matter who the speaker is, Bergman said.

Monday, January 25, 2010


By Bob Walsh

PacoVilla Corrections blog
January 25, 2010

Edward Smith, 65, of San Francisco is now the late Edward Smith. He learned the hard way that guns and alcohol and drugs don't mix, especially if you are the one who is drunk and stoned and the other guy has the gun.

The SFPD got a call about 5:25 pm yesterday reporting a man under the influence in the vicinity of Maynard St. and Mission. The cops showed up and spotted Smith, who came at them with a machete. The two officers ordered him multiple times to drop the toad sticker but he just kept coming so they stopped him with 3 rounds of whatever they are using in the People's Republic [of San Francisco]. Smith was pronounced dead at the scene.

I am fully confident the cops will now be subjected to a barrage of verbal abuse from morons who think they should have either wrestled with him or shot the machete out of his hand. Looking on the bright side however, it is one homicide they shouldn't have any trouble solving. It will help their stats.


Matthew Cate, a lawyer appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger as Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, has been the foremost defender of CDCR’s failing practices. Initially, he heaped praise on CDCR for its handling of the infamous Garrido kidnapping and rape case. Now he’s praising the state-sanctioned jail break which begins today.


By Paco

PacoVilla Corrections blog
January 25, 2010

By Sam Stanton

The Sacramento Bee
January 25, 2010

The state's controversial plan to reduce its prison population by 6,500 inmates over the next year begins today, with victims and law enforcement groups once again warning it will increase crime...Corrections director Matthew Cate has called the plan a "landmark achievement" in increasing public safety because it calls for parole agents to focus on higher risk parolees and cuts their average workloads from 70 parolees to 48.

Under the plan, convicts not subject to parole supervision still will be subject to law enforcement searches. Opponents say that is meaningless in practice.

"The one condition imposed on the released inmates, that they may be searched without a warrant, is a pretense that there are at least some limitations and oversight in place," Paul M. Weber, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, said in a statement issued last week.

"However, since local law enforcement doesn't even know who these inmates are, there is no substance to the search condition."

...Sacramento County Sheriff John McGinness said the result will be increased costs for local jails and courts.

"We're on the verge of a real crisis in criminal justice in California," he said.

Paco says:

Insofar as the SecrAttorney knows nothing about public safety, it is possible he really believes what he is saying. Yet, he is, first and foremost, a lawyer--Parsing words and misrepresenting the truth is what they do.

Thus, the question arises: Is Matt Cate a bald-faced liar or simply an idiot? Granted, the two aren't mutually exclusive: plenty of liars are idiots and vice versa. In any case, the math doesn't compute.

CLEARLY, releasing 6,500 inmates EARLY and keeping them off [parole] agent caseloads couldn't possibly result in the caseload reductions Cate touts. This isn't "fuzzy math"-- It is an outright lie.

According to CDCR's own reports, the parole population was 137,765 as of 12/31/2009. How can a reduction in the parole population of some 5% result in 30% reductions in parole agent caseloads?

SecrAttorney Cate is lying.

What else is new?

Sunday, January 24, 2010


ReentryConsultantOnline continues to defend the indefensible – a state-sanctioned jail break. Tomorrow the State will begin to dump thousands of prison inmates onto the streets of California, many of them WITHOUT ANY paroles supervision, thereby placing the public’s safety in peril.

In Bob Walsh’s words, “He is obviously a ‘warm and fuzzy care and treatment’ individual.” That, or he is a propagandist for the Governor and the Department of Corrections. ReentryConsultantOnline’s assertion that many of the released inmates need no supervision because they will “self correct” is absurd.

Back in the 1960s, the California adult parole division tried an interesting experiment. Three groups of parolees were established, each group having similar characteristics. Two consisted of the regular 70-man caseload. The third consisted of 35 parolees. One of the large groups required the established number of periodic field visits while the other large group received no supervision. The small group required intensive field supervision with a minimum of one visit a month for each parolee.

After one year, the results for the large group with supervision and the other group with no supervision were the same – a 40 percent recidivism rate. And what about the small group with intensive supervision? Its recidivism rate was much greater. Why? Because the parole agent conducting monthly field visits was able to detect criminal behavior more readily than the parole agent with the 70-man caseload.

In response to BarkGrowlBite and Bob Walsh’s rebuttal of his contention that the mass release of prison inmates would not jeopardize public safety, ReentryConsultantOnline wrote:

“BarkGrowlBite, It is true that it is not uncommon for the D.A. to offer a plea bargain to defendant’s but, that point in no way influence the outcome of a risk assessment in that, risk assessments are not determined by the inmate’s sentencing offense and/or criminal history only. The courts will not routinely allow the reduction of charges for defendant’s who perpetrate serious or violent felonies.

Of equal importance to note is that assessments of an inmate’s risk level (low, moderate, high) are determined by an assessment of the entire criminal history, overall risk potential, history of substance abuse, education, family background, triggers of criminal behavior and social functioning This is a nationwide practice.

For the definition of serious and Violent felonies in the state of California refer to 1192. 7 Penal Code (Serious Felonies) and 667.5 Penal Code (Violent Felonies) These penal codes will provide you with a laundry list of crimes which meet the definition of serious and violent felonies.

BarkGrowlBite I was not clear on one point regarding the low to moderate population. Research shows that low risk offenders are self-correcting and will not reap significant benefits from intensive treatments and many times will experience an increase in recidivism. The moderate risk offender does need intensive treatment for the best possibility of a reduction in recidivism. It is unfortunate that this population will be going on the Non-Revocable Parole status.

Bob Walsh - I agree that there are some flaws in the plan but; I can also tell you that California is following in the footsteps of many other states in the nation, by adopting policies supported by research. My comments were meant to correct the misinformation stated by the LAPPL.”

And here is how Bob Walsh responded to the above remarks by ReentryConsultantOnline:

“My mom once asked me if I would jump off a cliff if everybody else jumped off the cliff. I'm not a lemming.

California and many other states are making criminal justice decisions based on their wallet and available cell space and, to a lesser extent, political belief. Prisons are expensive.

Thing is, crime is expensive too. Prisons may not rehabilitate, but they do incapacitate. That's not wonderful, but it's better than a frozen carrot in the eyeball.

I am perhaps most bothered by the intellectual dishonesty of the presentation. The idea that you can predict dangerous behavior is idiotic. Anybody that tells you otherwise is delusional or a liar. When you add the fact that CDCR has a horrible track record in doing things as basic as complete file reviews (Charles Samuel and Phillip Garrido to name two of the most salient) the assertion that the people who will participate in the program will be properly screened to a meaningful criteria is false on it's face.

The intellectually honest thing to do (imagine that from a politician, or a professional bureaucrat) would be to say to the public; 'We believe we are spending too much money to keep prisoners in prison, therefore we are going to start not doing that. We will make a reasonable attempt to pick less dangerous criminals to let out of prison early. We will make a reasonable attempt to supervise some of the people we let out. Sometimes we will be successful. Sometimes we will fail. Some of these people will rob, rape and kill during the time period when they would otherwise be in prison. That's life in the real world. If you want more/better public safety, you as voters must demand that priorities be shifted. Have a nice day.'

California does not have a 70% recidivism rate because lack of good intentions. California has a 70% recidivism rate because criminal behavior is tolerated, and tolerated, and tolerated. Criminals expect that we will continue to tolerate it. In the thousands of C-files I have reviewed I have seen I believe THREE inmates who went to prison on a first offense, all were for murder. We offer multiple chances for people to get their mind right. At what point do we draw the line?

When do we pull needed funds out of 'normal' schools to pay $250,000per year for a DJJ [juvenile] ward? Why should we pay a ton of money for ‘special programs’ for violent assholes when students who want it are struggling for a basic education.

The FACT of the matter is you can not rehabilitate someone. They choose to rehabilitate themselves. They get tired of crime. They get tired of being arrested. They get tired of the risk. Then they rehabilitate themselves. They will stay off the drugs, off the booze. We can't force them. We can help them, but we can't force them.

Until they have reached that point the safest thing to do is either kill them or keep them locked up until they are ready. One option is not reasonable, the other is not cheap. Leaving felons on the street to continue to commit crimes will result in more crime. IT’S WHAT THEY DO, IT’S WHO THEY ARE."

Bob Walsh has made a compelling case against the cost-cutting early release of prison inmates. For our safety, on the other hand, ReentryConsultantOnline would have us rely on unpredictable predictions concerning the future behavior of criminals.

ReentryConsultantOnline accuses the Los Angeles Police Protective League with disseminating misinformation. My question is: Who should we believe? Someone who supports a state-sanctioned jai break or an organization that speaks for the 9,900 sworn members of the Los Angeles Police Department who try to keep that city safe? The answer is obvious and it's NOT ReentryConsultantOnline!

Friday, January 22, 2010


As you know, I have posted four “Consequences Of A State-Sanctioned Jail Break” blogs. It wasn’t until today that I noticed a comment posted on the Jan. 17th blog. ReentryConsultantOnline claims to be a long-time “Criminal Justice Practitioner” and tries to justify the upcoming early release of thousands of inmates from California’s prison system.

ReentryConsultantOnline said...

“First, let me straighten the record here, the California Department of Corrections (CDCR) will begin releasing inmates to a Non-Revocable Parole status only if they are assessed at low to moderate risk to recidivate and generally this group will self-corrects without post supervision. In fact in many cases, you can do more harm than good by housing this population with the more hardened criminal.

Inmates are excluded from Non Revocable Status if they have any Serious or Violent Felonies in their adult criminal history. Additionally, these parolees cannot have any serious prison violations during their incarceration. Sex Offenders will not be released to this status either.

An example of a Non-Revocable Parolee would be an individual who has a criminal history of property and/or drug related offenses. Many times, they have failed probation supervision and the courts elected to send them to prison.

The best way to address this population's triggers for criminality is by providing comprehensive service delivery to them at the local level.

As a Criminal Justice Practitioner, for more than 30 years, I can tell you that this group should be serviced on the local level. Research have demonstrated that Correctional Agencies will get the biggest bang for their buck (taxpayers buck) by concentrating their efforts on the inmate who represent the highest risk of recidivating.

Although the statistics that have been quoted in this blog regarding the costs of recidivism are true, they do not necessarily apply to the inmate that CDCR is releasing to Non-Revocable Parole status.

Last, LAPD and all other law enforcement agencies have access to a CDCR database which will inform them who is on active or Non-Revocable Parole.”

This is how I responded to his false assertions:

“What a crock!

As a criminal justice practitioner of more than 30 years, ReentryConsultantOnline knows very well that many of those "low to moderate risk to recidivate" inmates copped a plea to reduced charges - from a crime of violence to a non-violent offense or from a serious felony to a less serious felony.

His statement that "this group will self-corrects without post supervision" is absurd and flies in the face of numerous academic studies on the recidivism of released prison inmates.”

And this is how Bob Walsh, a pragmatic correctional expert, responded:

“Any moron can leave a comment. Some of them you wonder what planet they came from. This guy’s terminology is a dead giveaway. He is a shill [for the California corrections department]. The notion that the government can predict future dangerousness by looking at tiny slices of a person’s background is ludicrous.

While it is indeed possible the ReentryConsultantOnline has had some sort of 30 year past as a ‘criminal justice practitioner’ it is doubtful that he is truly involved in law enforcement.

He is obviously a ‘warm and fuzzy care and treatment’ individual. His use of the catch phrase ‘providing comprehensive service delivery’ makes that obvious.

I am not a lock them up forever guy. That would be idiotic and counterproductive. In fact I even support the notion of a small, focused, carefully chosen summary parole program just to see what happens.

However, when you kick out thousands and thousands of convicted felons using a pocket calculator as your primary tool, the goal being simply to empty cells, you can not seriously claim to be helping or supporting public safety.

ANY form of conditional release has issues, and will occasionally produce failure. When it's done off the cuff, it will produce many failures, some of them spectacular, to the detriment of the general public. Pretending it is being done carefully and with due consideration will not make it so.”

This is Centurion’s conclusion:

“I maintain that this has come from someone pretty high up in our [California corrections] administration. He used all the right buzz words and phrases, has the company mindset, is well educated, and writes very well. The adherence to and observance of the current administration mantra regarding this early release travesty is there as well.

ReentryConsultantOnline sounds like one of Arnold Schwarzenegger's bureaucratic talking heads. I know spin when I see it......and I've just seen it. This guy is a company man through and through.”

Bob Walsh and Centurion have exposed this charlatan for what he is – a spokesperson defending the indefensible on behalf of the Department of Corrections and the Governor.

Let me remind everyone that “according to independent research organizations, for every 5,000 felons who receive an early release, 45,500 new crimes will be committed over a three-year period, and 9,000 of those crimes will be violent felonies.”

ReentryConsultantOnline had to have read those alarming facts since that was the leadoff paragraph in the blog to which he responded with his comments. He conveniently chose to disregard those facts as well as numerous other studies that have reached similar conclusions.


by Diana West
January 22, 2010

"Do you believe in 'radical Islam'?" the famous Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders once asked me.

The occasion was a banquet last summer at the Reagan Library outside of Los Angeles where later that evening Wilders would receive a Hero of Conscience award from the American Freedom Alliance. I would have the honor of introducing him. "What did you say?" I could barely hear him over the speaker at the podium elaborating on the perils of, yes, "radical Islam."

"'Radical Islam,'" he repeated. "Do you think there is 'radical Islam,' or only 'Islam'"?

Me, I'm an "only Islam" kind of gal, as I told him. Who am I to argue with Muslims ranging from terror-cleric Abu Qatada to Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan? Erdogan is particularly interesting as a democratically elected Islamic leader who eschews all word-modifiers of Islam including "moderate," the adjective the media often applies to his AKP political party. "These descriptions are very ugly," Erdogan said in 2007. "It is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and that's it." Erdogan has also bluntly rejected descriptions of Turkey itself as an example of "moderate Islam," saying last April: "It is unacceptable for us to agree with such a definition. Turkey has never been a country to represent such a concept. Moreover, Islam cannot be classified as moderate or not."

I mention this now because after the fireworks over Scott Brown's U.S. Senate victory in Massachusetts have died down, we will have to return to the same, old, equal parts humdrum and deadly wrangle over how to think, talk about and grapple with Islam in what remains a post-9/11 world.

Two related events took place just as the Massachusetts miracle sucked the oxygen from non-election news excepting Haiti coverage. First, the Pentagon report on the Fort Hood massacre came out. It is 86 pages long and doesn't mention the words "Muslim," "Islam," "jihad," "Sharia" (Islamic law), "Koran" -- despite the fact that we know, among other things, that the killer, who initiated his massacre with a cry of "Allahu Akbar," was a Muslim inspired by Islam to perform an act of jihad as sanctioned by Sharia derived from the Koran.

These facts, however, rate official silence. So what else is new? From the Bush years to the present, see-no-Islam denial has turned U.S. government attempts to assess and discuss national security issues into Kabuki gibberish, a perpetual exercise in make-believe that the core doctrines and traditional institutions of Islam -- not "radical Islam," not "Islamism," not other aliases -- pose no threat to the core doctrines and traditional institutions of the non-Islamic Free World. Naturally, mum's the Pentagon word over jihad at Fort Hood. Or, rather, "self-radicalization" is the word. It is mentioned more than a dozen times in the report.

I can't imagine a greater dereliction of duty than this failure of U.S. government leaders to recognize, articulate and defend against what in military parlance is known as the "enemy threat doctrine." But this dereliction, this failure will trigger no investigations or court proceedings on how and why our leaders consistently mask, soft-soap and otherwise fail to assess and repel the existential threat posed by the imposition or accommodation of these same Islamic doctrines.

Talk about irony: Within days of the report's release, one of the few politicians in the world who understands, articulates and fights the imposition and accommodation of these same Islamic doctrines went on trial in the Netherlands for doing exactly that.

I refer again to Geert Wilders, now enmeshed in a Kafkaesque court trial in which the Dutch government is subverting its own democratic institutions -- namely, freedom of speech and the will of the people -- in an effort to shut down Wilders and his political opposition to the Islamization of the Netherlands. The government's case rests on Wilders' increasingly successful efforts to win support for his anti-Islamization program from the Dutch people through speeches, writings and the short film "Fitna" (easily viewable online) -- a body of work that only a tyrannical, Islamically correct government could designate as "evidence" of a crime.

How Dutch government officials must envy America's Sharia-compliant public servants who willingly generate see-no-Islam blather such as the Fort Hood report.

They can have it.


January 21, 2010

The Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL), representing the 9,900 sworn members of the Los Angeles Police Department, wrote to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today outlining three steps the Governor should take before releasing thousands of felons back into local communities.

“We are very concerned that the released prison inmates will be completely unsupervised and will be sent back into local communities without any attempt to transition them back into society,” said Paul M. Weber, President of the Los Angeles Police Protective League. “Released felons will be on ‘non-revocable’ releases, meaning they cannot be sent back to prison unless charged and convicted of a new crime – so in essence, their sentence for the current crime has been commuted.”

“The one condition imposed on the released inmates, that they may be searched without a warrant, is a pretense that there are at least some limitations and oversight in place. However, since local law enforcement doesn’t even know who these inmates are, there is no substance to the search condition,” added Weber.

“We are concerned about victims these felons will leave in their wake before being rearrested for committing new crimes. Our concerns are supported by research,” stated Weber. In an extensive study titled The Effect of Prison Release on Regional Crime Rates, UC Berkeley Professor Steven Raphael and UCLA Professor Michael Stoll explicitly document a rise in crime correlated to prison release and warn of the dangers of large releases – like the one we are on the verge of.

The text of the LAPPL letter to the Governor follows:

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:

We are writing to express our deepest concerns about the upcoming massive release of state prison inmates throughout California.

The safety of the residents in our communities must always be the most important obligation of government. The planned early release of 25,000 inmates on January 25 will seriously compromise the efforts of law enforcement to control crime in their communities and protect the public. As the leaders of the largest law enforcement unions in the state, we would like to request that the state implement the following three measures before you begin your massive early prisoner release:

1. Ability to object prior to release -The state should notify local law enforcement agencies with information regarding each felon who is to be released early, and a review board should be established which will allow the local law enforcement officials to object to the release of a felon and have its objections both reviewed and documented by State Parole. This allows each impacted community to voice their concerns about the inmate prior to release, and hopefully impact releases which will adversely affect the community.

2. Notification prior to release - Once a determination has been made to release a felon, the state must notify the local police station two weeks prior to release or authorized relocation of any felon. The following information should be conveyed: the felon's address; the crime for which they were committed and full criminal history; the name of the responsible parole officer and that officers' supervisor, and any conditions which have been placed on the parolee so that local law enforcement can perform Fourth Amendment waiver searches.

3. Tools to monitor after release - The state must immediately notify the local police station of any parolee who absconds, tampers with GPS or other tracking devices, undertakes any efforts to subvert the officers' ability to monitor the parolee, or has been given permission by Parole to relocate out of the community. As a condition of release, the state should require that every felon released early be required to identify himself/herself to any law enforcement officer, and acknowledge his/her “search and seizure” term as if on supervised parole when contacted by local law enforcement

We are concerned that in an effort to save money, public safety and the crime reductions that many communities have seen will be jeopardized. We believe that the three suggestions above are reasonable and reconcile the needs of public safety and the cost reductions the state desires while lessening the adverse impacts of the upcoming release program upon local communities.


The Islamic terrorists are winning! The underwear bomber has set off a state of panic among air travelers and airline crews. A Jewish youth set off a bomb scare on an airliner when he started to pray with his tefillin.

Tefillin are a set of small cubic leather boxes painted black, containing scrolls of parchment inscribed with verses from the Torah, with leather straps dyed black on one side, and worn by Orthodox Jewish men during weekday morning prayers. The hand-tefillin is placed on the upper left arm, and the strap wrapped around the arm, hand and fingers; while the head-tefillin is placed above the forehead, with the strap going around the head and over the shoulders. The Torah commands that they should be worn to serve as a "sign" and "remembrance" that God brought the children of Israel out of Egypt.

When the youth started his prayer ritual, the passengers and crew panicked. The flight was diverted to Philadelphia International Airport where it made an emergency landing and taxied to a remote section of the tarmac. The plane was immediately surrounded by fire trucks, ambulances and police cars. The passengers and crew were evacuated and the plane was boarded by Philadelphia police officers, FBI agents and TSA officials. Police “escorted” the 17-year-old “terrorist suspect” off the aircraft. A bomb squad searched the plane for explosive devices.

Here is a New York Daily News report on the tefillin terrorist:

BY Rocco Parascandola and Larry Mcshane
January 21, 2010

A Jewish prayer box worn by a teen passenger caused a Thursday morning furor on a flight from LaGuardia Airport, forcing an emergency landing in Philadelphia, authorities said.

The mix-up involved the 17-year-old boy's tefillin, a black box filled with Biblical verses and tied with leather straps to his head, said Philadelphia police Lt. Frank Vanore.

Fears of a potential terrorist attack led the Louisville, Ky.,-bound flight to instead land at Philadelphia International Airport just before 9 a.m., authorities said.

All 15 passengers and 3 crew members aboard U.S. Airways Express Flight 3709 were safely evacuated after the sudden landing, said airline spokesman Jim Olson.

Although the teen explained the significance of the tefillin to the crew, the pilot opted to land the plane in Philadelphia anyway, Vanore said.

The tefillin-wearing youth was traveling with his sister from New York to Louisville. The boxes - a second one is tied around the arm - are typically worn by men in certain Orthodox Jewish communities.

The flight was met by law enforcement personnel and officials from the Transportation Security Administration.

The teen was interviewed and the plane swept for explosive devices, with nothing found, the TSA said in a statement.

Vanore said the unidentified youth was cooperative with authorities after the plane landed.

Thursday, January 21, 2010


Many countries and world leaders have accused Israel of responding disproportionately to aggression from Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.
However, it is time that the world press and media speak of another
disproportionate response from Israel.

The terrible disastrous earthquake in Haiti has generated responses from many nations. The US has sent supplies and personnel, Britain sent 64 firemen and 8 volunteers, France sent troops for Search and Rescue. Many large and wealthy nations of the world sent money. The Arab and Moslem world nothing.

Israel, a nation of 7.5 million people has sent a team of 220 people that include Medical personnel and will establish the largest field hospital with state-of-the-art diagnostic equipment in Haiti, treating up to 5000 people a day, an experienced Search and Rescue team and medical supplies. As in previous earthquake disasters, such as in Gujarat India in 2001 and in Turkey, in the bombings in Kenya, Israel has been one of the most generous givers of aid and assistance. Turkey seems to have forgotten this help as its extreme Moslem Government is cozying up to Iran.

The favorite occupation in the UN is Israel bashing. More resolutions have been passed condemning Israel than all the so called democratic nations such as Sudan, China, Russia and others for their crimes against their minorities.

It is time that the world should know about Israel's disproportionate response.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

OFFICER, I ..........

The police officer got out of his car as the kid who was stopped for speeding rolled down his window. 'I've been waiting for you all day,' the officer said.

The kid replied, ‘Yeah, well I got here as fast as I could.'

When the cop finally stopped laughing, he sent the kid on his way without a ticket.

A truck driver was driving along on the freeway and noticed a sign that read: Low Bridge Ahead. Before he knows it, the bridge is right in front of him and his truck gets wedged under it. Cars are backed up for miles.

Finally a police car comes up. The cop gets out of his car and walks to the truck driver, puts his hands on his hips and says, 'Got stuck, huh?'

The truck driver says, 'No, I was delivering this bridge and I ran out of gas.'

I PREDICT THAT ..........

(1) Obama will be a one-term president.

(2) Within a year or so, Hillary Clinton will resign as Secretary of State to free herself up for a 2012 run for the presidency.


President Obama has declared that "the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam." Wake up Mr. President, Islam is at war with us and has been for a long time.

Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician and leader of the Party for Freedom, a political party in The Netherlands. He has benn outspoken on the Islamization of Europe. His trial on charges of inciting racial hatred against Muslims began today in Amsterdam.

Here are some excerpts from a speech Wilders gave in Copenhagen, Denmark on June 14, 2009:

For the first time in world history there are dozens of millions of Muslims living far outside the Dar al-Islam, the Islamic world. Al-Hijra may be the end of European civilization as we know it: The second Dutch city, Rotterdam, will have a non-Western majority within 3 years. Europe has now more than 50 million Muslims, it is expected that this will be doubled in just 20 years. By 2025, one third of all European children will be born to Muslim families.

As I said, many of those Muslims in Europe would like to implement Shariah Law in our judicial systems. As you know, Shariah law covers all areas of life, from religion, hygiene and dietary laws, to dress code, family and social life and from finance and politics to the unity of Islam with the state. For some crimes, horrific, barbaric punishments are prescribed, such as beheading and the chopping off of opposite limbs. In Shariah Courts no woman may become judge. Shariah Law does not recognize free speech and freedom of religion. Polygamy and killing an apostate are ‘virtues’, but the consumption of alcohol is a crime. This is the sick Shariah Law in a nutshell, and it is unbelievable and unacceptable that the cultural relativists allow Shariah banks, Shariah mortgages, Shariah schools and unofficial — and in Britain even official — Shariah tribunals in Europe.

Ladies and gentlemen, these are of course shocking facts, figures and statements. However, they are not particularly surprising to anybody who has some knowledge of the Koran and knows who Muhammad was.

In this connection, ladies and gentlemen, allow me to very briefly discuss the essence of Islam, and let me come straight to the point: Islam is not so much a religion as, first and foremost, an ideology; to be precise, like communism and fascism, a political, totalitarian ideology, with worldwide aspirations.

Of course, there are many moderate Muslims. However, there is no such a thing as a moderate Islam. Islam’s heart lies in the Koran. The Koran is an evil book that calls for violence, murder, terrorism, war and submission. The Koran describes Jews as monkeys and pigs. The Koran calls upon Muslims to kill the Kaffirs, the non-Muslims.

The problem is that the injunctions in the Koran are not restricted to time or place. Rather, they apply to all Muslims, in any period. Another problem is that Muslims also regard the Koran as the word of Allah. Which means that the Koran is immune from criticism.

Apart from the Koran, there is also the life of Muhammad, who fought in dozens of wars and was in the habit of decapitating Jews with his own sword. The problem here is that, to Muslims, Muhammad is ‘the perfect man’, whose life is the model to follow.

This is why Jihadists slaughtered innocent people in Washington, New York, Madrid, Amsterdam, London and Mumbai.

Now it is clear why Winston Churchill, in his book ‘The second world war’, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Literature, compared the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’. Now is clear why the famous Swiss theologian, Karl Barth, in 1936 said, and I quote, “It is impossible to understand national socialism unless we see it in fact as a new Islam, its myth as a new Allah, and Hitler as this new Allah’s prophet.” Now is clear why Heinrich Himmler was an admirer of Islam. And now is clear why President Obama, who last week, in Cairo, said that Islam has a tradition of tolerance, should be sent back to school.

Just like communism, fascism and nazism, Islam is a threat to everything we stand for. It is a threat to democracy, to the constitutional state, to equality for men and women, to freedom and civilisation. Wherever you look in the world, the more Islam you see, the less freedom you see. Islam is a threat to the Europe of Bach and Michelangelo, Shakespeare and Socrates, Voltaire and Galileo.

Ladies and gentlemen, there is one Western country that has been forced to fight for its values since the very first day of its existence: Israel the canary in the coal mine. Let me say a few words about that wonderful country.

Like Bosnia, Kosovo, Nigeria, Sudan, the Caucasus, Kashmir, southern Thailand, western China and the south of the Philippines, Israel is situated exactly on the dividing line between Dar al-Islam, the Islamic world, and Dar al-Harb, the non-Islamic world. It is no coincidence that it is precisely this dividing line where blood is flowing. All those conflicts concern the Jihad, Jihad in the spirit of the barbarian Muhammad.

Islam forces Israel to fight. The so called ‘Middle East conflict’ is not at all a conflict about land. It is not about some inches of land in Gaza, Judea or Samaria. It is a conflict about ideologies, it is a battle between freedom and Islam, a battle between good and evil, to Islam the whole of Israel is occupied territory. To Islam Tel Aviv and Haifa are settlements too.

Israel is the only democracy in the entire Middle-East. Israel is an oasis of enlightment, whereas the rest of the Middle-East is covered by the black veil of the night. This is no coincidence, in 1939 Winston Churchill said about the Jews in what is now called Israel: “They have made the desert bloom”.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am very much in favour of a two-state solution. One Jewish state called Israel including Judea and Samaria and one Palestinian state called Jordan.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010


Police and fire departments are not recession proof. Budgets are being cut. That means jobs are going to be on the line. When faced with job cuts or pay cuts, the police union of the Tracy (California) Police Department agreed to forego pay raises and benefit increases, in effect agreeing to a pay cut. How many other police and fire departments will be faced with the same choices?

By Bob Walsh

PacoVilla Corrections blog
January 19, 2010

The Tracy Police Officers Association took a vote Friday. They decided to significantly amend their current contract, which runs until July 2011. They agreed to forgo scheduled pay raises and benefit increases for the length of the contract. They further agreed to bump up the retirement age from 50 to 55. The outcome of the vote was as expected according to Marc Berman, president of the TPOA.

The Department has 85 officers and took a $1.12 million dollar hit. The concessions will avoid layoffs, which would have included the gang unit, two Sergeants and one Captain.

The Tracy City Council is expected to vote on the proposal possibly as soon as tonight.


To jumpstart his love affair with Muslims, President Obama addressed the Turkish parliament last April and declared “The United States is not and never will be at war with Islam.” Oh yeah? How naive can our president be?

As I’ve said before, we are at war with Islam, not with al-Qaida or the Taliban. President Obama just doesn’t get it. He’s too busy reaching out to the Muslim World, which is the part of the world that wants to destroy us.

Political commentator Mark Steyn believes that Eurabia — a future where the European continent is dominated by Islam — is an imminent reality that cannot be reversed. Here is his take on the illusionary course Obama has been following:

Isolated extremists? This “war” is about the intersection of Islam and the West.

By Mark Steyn

nationalreview online
January 9, 2010

Not long after the Ayatollah Khomeini announced his fatwa against Salman Rushdie, the British novelist suddenly turned up on a Muslim radio station in West London late one night and told his interviewer he’d converted to Islam. Marvelous religion, couldn’t be happier, Allahu Akbar and all that.

And the Ayatollah said hey, that’s terrific news, glad to hear it. But we’re still gonna kill you.

Well, even a leftie novelist wises up under those circumstances.

Evidently, the president of the United States takes a little longer. Barack Obama has spent the last year doing bigtime Islamoschmoozing, from his announcement of Gitmo’s closure and his investigation of Bush officials to his bow before the Saudi King and a speech in Cairo to “the Muslim world” with far too many rhetorical concessions and equivocations. And at the end of it, the jihad sent America a thank-you note by way of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s underwear: Hey, thanks for all the outreach! But we’re still gonna kill you.

According to one poll, 58 percent of Americans are in favor of waterboarding young Umar Farouk. Well, you should have thought about that before you made a community organizer president of the world’s superpower. The election of Barack Obama was a fundamentally unserious act by the U.S. electorate, and you can’t blame the world’s mischief-makers, from Putin to Ahmadinejad to the many Gitmo recidivists now running around Yemen, from drawing the correct conclusion.

For two weeks, the government of the United States has made itself a global laughingstock. Don’t worry, “the system worked,” said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Incompetano. Don’t worry, he was an “isolated extremist,” said the president. Don’t worry, we’re banning bathroom breaks for the last hour of the flight, said the TSA. Don’t worry, “U.S. border-security officials” told the Los Angeles Times, we knew he was on the plane and we “had decided to question him when he landed.” Don’t worry, Obama’s chief counterterrorism John Brennan assured the Sunday talk shows, sure, we read him his rights and he’s lawyered up but he’ll soon see that “there is advantage to talking to us in terms of plea agreements.”

Oh, that’s grand. Try to kill hundreds of people in an act of war and it’s the starting point for a plea deal. In his Cairo speech, the president bragged that the United States would “punish” those in America who would “deny” the “right of women and girls to wear the hijab.” If he’s so keen on it, maybe he should consider putting the entire federal government into full-body burkas and zipping up the eye slit so that henceforth every public utterance by John Brennan will be entirely inaudible. Americans should be ashamed by this all-fools’ fortnight.

On Thursday, having renounced over the preceding days “the system worked,” the “isolated extremist,” the more obviously risible TSA responses, the Gitmo-Yemen express checkout, and various other follies, the president finally spoke the words: “We are at war.” As National Review’s Rich Lowry noted, they were more or less dragged from the presidential gullet by Dick Cheney, who’d accused the commander-in-chief of failing to grasp this basic point. Again, to be fair, it isn’t just Obama. Last November, the electorate voted in effect to repudiate the previous eight years and seemed genuinely under the delusion that wars end when one side decides it’s all a bit of a bore and they’d rather the government spend the next eight years doing to health care and the economy what they were previously doing to jihadist camps in Waziristan.

On the other hand, if we are now at war, as Obama belatedly concedes, against whom are we warring? “We are at war against al-Qaeda,” says the president.

Really? But what does that mean? Was the previous month’s “isolated extremist” — the Fort Hood killer — part of al-Qaeda? When it came to spiritual advice, he turned to the same Yemeni-based American-born imam as the Pantybomber, but he didn’t have a fully paid-up membership card. Nor did young Umar Farouk, come to that. Granted the general over-credentialization of American life, the notion that it doesn’t count as terrorism unless you’re a member of Local #437 of the Amalgamated Union of Isolated Extremists seems perverse and reductive. What did the Pantybomber have a membership card in? Well, he was president of the Islamic Society of University College, London. Kafeel Ahmed, who died after driving a burning jeep into the concourse of Glasgow Airport, had been president of the Islamic Society of Queen’s University, Belfast. Yassin Nassari, serving three years in jail for terrorism, was president of the Islamic Society of the University of Westminster. Waheed Arafat Khan, arrested in the 2006 Heathrow terror plots that led to Americans having to put their liquids and gels in those little plastic bags, was president of the Islamic Society of London Metropolitan University.

Doesn’t this sound like a bigger problem than “al-Qaeda” — whatever that is? The president has now put citizens of Nigeria on the secondary-screening list. Which is tough on Nigerian Christians, who have no desire to blow up your flight to Detroit. Aside from the highly localized Tamil terrorism of India and Sri Lanka, suicide bombing is a phenomenon entirely of Islam. The broader psychosis that manifested itself only the other day in an axe murderer breaking into a Danish cartoonist’s home to kill him because he objects to his cartoon is likewise a phenomenon of Islam. This is not to say (to go wearily through the motions) that all Muslims are potential suicide bombers and axe murderers, but it is to state the obvious — that this “war” is about the intersection of Islam and the West, and its warriors are recruited in the large pool of young Muslim manpower, not in Yemen and Afghanistan so much as in Copenhagen and London.

But the president of the United States cannot say that because he is over-invested in a fantasy — that, if only that Texan moron Bush had read Khalid Sheikh Mohammed his Miranda rights and bowed as low as he did to the Saudi king, we wouldn’t have all these problems. So now Obama says, “We are at war.” But he cannot articulate any war aims or strategy because they would conflict with his illusions. And so we will stagger on, playing defense, pulling more and more items out of our luggage — tweezers, shoes, shampoo, snowglobes, suppositories — and reacting to every new provocation with greater impositions upon the citizenry. You can’t win by putting octogenarian nuns through full-body scanners. All you can do is lose slowly. After all, if you can’t even address what you’re up against with any honesty, you can’t blame the other side for drawing entirely reasonable conclusions about your faintheartedness in taking them on.

After that cringe-making radio interview, Salman Rushdie subsequently told the Times of London that trying to appease his would-be killers and calling for his own book to be withdrawn was the biggest mistake of his life. If only the president of the United States were such a quick study.

— Mark Steyn, a National Review columnist, is author of America Alone. © 2010 Mark Steyn

Monday, January 18, 2010


Yesterday, in “A Real Class Act,” I wrote about Cowboys owner Jerry Jones rushing on the field at the end of the game to give Minnesota quarterback Brett Favre a big hug after the Vikings had thrashed his team’s dreams of a Super Bowl game.

That is not what Dallas linebacker Keith Brooking did. After Jones had hugged Favre, Brooking rushed over to the sidelines to berate Favre, the Vikings and their coach for running up the score with a late game touchdown, well after the game had already been decided. In the post-game press conference a still seething Brooking told reporters that the Vikings had been “classless and disrespectful.

I’ve got news for Mr. Brooking. If he and his teammates hadn’t done such a lousy job on defense, the score probably wouldn’t have been so lopsided. Sorry Brooking, but yours was the only classless act out there – in fact, it was a real classless act!

Here is the story:

By Chris Chase

Yahoo! Sports
January 17, 2010

Did the Minnesota Vikings run up the score on the Dallas Cowboys in Sunday's NFC divisional playoff? Keith Brooking thinks so. A late Brett Favre touchdown pass infuriated the Dallas linebacker, who charged over to the Vikings' sideline to voice his displeasure. And in his post-game press conference he didn't back down.

The Vikings had held a comfortable 27-3 lead since the early part of the fourth quarter. Dallas looked completely deflated after going down 24 points and the team's subsequent play did nothing to dispel that notion. On the Cowboys' next two possessions the team went four-and-out, gaining a mere 14 yards on eight plays.

After the second turnover on downs, Minnesota took over on Dallas' 37-yard line. With 5:26 remaining and the Vikes holding a nearly insurmountable lead, runs to milk the clock were expected. But after an Adrian Peterson run on first down, Favre hit Bernard Berrian for 19 yards on the next play. Two Peterson runs followed, before Favre threw a short three-yard pass to bring up fourth-and-three after the two minute warning.

Here, the Vikes had four choices: 1. They could take a knee and give Dallas the ball back for the game's final two minutes; 2. Wave a partial white flag and run the ball up the middle; 3. Kick a field goal (which also could have been perceived as running up the score); 4. Drop Favre back to attempt a pass.

Minnesota went with option No. 4 and Favre hit tight end Visanthe Shiancoe for an 11-yard touchdown. This choice did not go over well with Brooking. The Cowboys' linebacker, presumably upset because he felt Minnesota was running up the score, stormed over to the Vikings sideline and exchanged words with coaches and players, including Favre. He had yet to calm down after the game:

"I thought it was totally classless and disrespectful. This is the NFL, that's not what this is about. I don't think there's a place for that ... I was looking for [Vikings coach Brad] Childress. I didn't think it was right, but they've got to see us next year."

Brooking needs to relax and listen to his own words.

He's right. This is the NFL, not high school or college. The Dallas Cowboys don't get sympathy. Throwing that pass may not have been the greatest sportsmanship, but it also wasn't an affront to decency. If Brooking didn't want Minnesota to score then maybe he and his 10 teammates on the field should have done something about it.

Just because the Cowboys quit doesn't mean the Vikings needed to also.


The victim of a scam targeting older men sent me this warning. I believe that younger men could fall victim to this scam as well.


Please be careful guys....I just don't want any of you to have to go through this.

Women often receive warnings about protecting themselves at the mall and in dark parking lots, etc.

This is the first warning I have seen for men. I wanted to pass it on in case you haven't heard about it. This will only become more commonplace when the weather warms.

A 'heads up' for those men who may be regular Lowe's, Home Depot, or Wal-Mart customers. This one caught me by surprise.

Over the last month I became a victim of a clever scam while out shopping. Simply going out to get supplies has turned out to be quite traumatic. Don't be naive enough to think it couldn't happen to you or your friends...

Here's how the scam works:

Two seriously good-looking 20-something girls come over to your car as you are packing your shopping into the trunk. They both start wiping your windshield with a rag and Windex, with their breasts almost falling out of their skimpy halter tops. It is impossible not to look. When you thank them and offer them a tip, they say 'No' and instead ask you for a ride to McDonalds.

You agree and they get into the back seat. On the way, they start undressing. Then one of them climbs over into the front seat and starts crawling all over you, while the other one steals your wallet.

I had my wallet stolen December 4th, 9th, 10th, twice on the 15th, 17th, 20th, 24th, & 29th. Also November 1st & 4th, twice on the 8th, 16th, 23rd, 26th & 28th, three times last Saturday.

So tell your friends to be careful. What a horrible way to take advantage of older men. Warn your friends to be vigilant.

Wal-Mart has wallets on sale for $2.99 each. I found cheaper ones for $1.99 at Dollar General and bought them out. Also, you never will get to eat at McDonalds. I've already lost 11 pounds just running back and forth to Wal-Mart, Lowe's, and Home Depot.


Research will help the department focus its efforts to benefit the community

By Jesse B. Gill

Redlands Daily Facts
January 17, 2010

REDLANDS, Calif. — The Police Department is ramping up its efforts to use a scientific approach in suppressing crime.

On Dec. 6, police corporals, sergeants and lieutenants filed into the Carriage House at Prospect Park for training in evidence-based police techniques. Dr. Cynthia Lum traveled from George Mason University near Washington D.C. to train the Redlands police personnel.

"(Evidence-based policing) is basically applying research into the application of policing," said Detective Ben Zimmerman.

Police Chief Jim Bueermann said the concept of evidence-based policing is modeled after medical research.

Medical research forms largely-accepted opinions about what does and does not work on patients, Bueermann said. Evidence-based policing does the same thing, except with what works in policing specific communities.

"I'm very excited about it," he said.

The department recently hired a criminologist thanks to a U.S. Department of Justice grant. He is now undergoing a routine background check before starting work with the department. After his background check is complete, Zimmerman and Sgt. Rachel Tolber will work with the criminologist to put the evidence-based policing techniques into practice.

The criminologist will help the department find crime-fighting programs that are the right fit for Redlands, said Cmdr. Tom Fitzmaurice. And those programs will help the department focus its efforts in ways that will best benefit the community.

"A lot that's done in policing is done because of tradition, because it's worked before, or because it worked for one department," Fitzmaurice said. "They think that because it worked for (one department), they think it will work for everybody when they haven't evaluated the programs to see why it works."

ESRI mapping software has also allowed the department to take its research techniques to a new level, Bueermann said. The software changed the department's focus from beats and districts to addresses and streets where data shows crime is most likely to occur.

"Their software allows us to do things that we would never have been able to do in the past," Bueermann said. "We didn't have the ability to look at crime data the way we do now."

The concept of evidenced-based policing is not new to the Police Department, Zimmerman said. Bueermann has stressed an academic approach to police work for years.

"He's a very innovative person," Zimmerman said.

Sunday, January 17, 2010


Led by 40-year-old twice retired Brett Favre, who threw four touchdown passes, the Minnesota Vikings gave the Dallas Cowboys a real 34-3 ass whipping, thus erasing any dreams the Cowboys had of making it to the Super Bowl.

A grim-faced Jerry Jones, owner of the Cowboys, appeared on the sidelines as the game was winding down. When the game ended, Jones rushed on the field, sought out Favre, and gave him a big hug. Now that was a real class act!


According to independent research organizations, for every 5,000 felons who receive an early release, 45,500 new crimes will be committed over a three-year period, and 9,000 of those crimes will be violent felonies.


Los Angeles Police Protective League
January 15, 2010

Starting January 25th, thousands of dangerous criminals will be released early from California state prisons – and for the first time in nearly 30 years, sent back to local communities without any supervision.

“The County of Los Angeles will be dramatically impacted, with over 5,000 felons to be released to our city,” said Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL) President Paul M. Weber.

“What concerns law enforcement is that unlike the current program, where released inmates have been placed on parole, restricted from certain types of activities, or provided various community-based rehabilitative resources, these inmates will be completely unsupervised.

“The only condition for these released inmates is that local law enforcement officers are allowed to search them without a warrant. However, since local law enforcement will not know who these people are, that is a virtually useless provision,” Weber said.

“We can expect crime to go up as a result of this massive release, considering California has the highest recidivism rate in the nation, with seven out of ten parolees reoffending then returning to the prison system,” added Weber.

For months the LAPPL has been warning the public that the prison gates are going to fly open in order to close the state budget deficit.

“Now we know that January 25th is the date that the state of California has decided to begin jeopardizing public safety with no perceivable financial benefit,” continued Weber.

“It is a virtual certainty that the releases’ overall cost and risk to local communities are going to far outweigh any initial savings for the state. Each incident of crime costs taxpayers, on average, $18,000 for arrest and prosecution. Thus, the early release program will cost taxpayers more in the long run based on the number of inmates to be released and standard recidivism rates. On top of the wasted dollars there is a much greater toll – the pain and suffering of victims, their families and our communities.”

Weber said he disagrees with state officials who will attempt to portray some of the inmates being released as low-risk and nonviolent.

“The people being considered for release are convicted felons, many of whom have plea bargained their crimes down to lesser offenses. A large number of them are parole violators – in other words, they are people who have already proven they cannot remain law abiding after being released from prison."

Saturday, January 16, 2010



The Washington Post
January 10, 2010


I invite readers to undertake a brief thought experiment with me. The Jan. 1 front-page article "Homicide totals in 2009 plummet in District, Prince George's" reported that the District has just experienced its lowest total number of homicides in 45 years. This was also the first full year after the D.C. handgun ban was found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, and therefore the first year that city residents were able to maintain handguns legally in their homes.

The thought experiment is this: If the numbers had, tragically, gone the other way, and 2009 had the highest number of murders in nearly a half-century, imagine the hue and cry that would have gone up from opponents of Second Amendment rights. There can be no doubt that The Post's editorial page would have cried ominously that the increase was linked to the court decision, and anti-gun activists of all stripes would have been hysterical.

More disturbing still is that the article made no mention of the Heller decision. Surely, regardless of one's political opinions, it is reasonable to expect that a news article focused on a remarkable and startling change in the homicide rate would at least mention the landmark ruling that led to the only significant change in the District landscape in 2009.

William Ciucci, Washington


Wake up parents! Thanks to your hard-earned dollars, this is the drivel that some of your kids are getting from Marxist professors at our nation’s colleges and universities. All Americans, not only parents, should be incensed that their taxes are paying the salaries of ideologues who are trying to poison, not enlighten, the minds of impressionable students in our publicly funded institutions of higher (?) education.

The Progressive Workers Organization Committee is a campus group at College of the Mainland that was founded by one of the college's professors and his wife. COM is a community college located in Texas City, between Houston and Galveston. The telephone number for this organization, 281-534-7638, is listed as DAVID OR RONA SMITH. COM government professor David Michael Smith is a self-avowed Marxist and his wife Rona, also a Marxist, is a public school counselor. Rona Smith was once quoted by the local newspaper as declaring that THE REVOLUTION CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH LITTLE OR NO VIOLENCE.

Here is the organization’s manifesto, the standard fare put out by Marxist professors:


P.O. Box 234
Dickinson, Texas 77537
United States

We are an organization of working class people committed to the development of a mass revolutionary and democratic socialist party in the United States. We call ourselves an Organizing Committee because we recognize that we are only the nucleus of a pre-party formation. We understand that many years of difficult work will be required for us to develop into a political party which can unite working class women and men of all races, nationalities, and cultural backgrounds in the struggle for fundamental social transformation.

We are committed to the abolition of capitalism because this economic and social order is inherently based on exploitation and oppression. Although capitalism is different than slavery or feudal societies in some important ways, it is grounded in the exploitation of workers labor power through the process of wage labor. In this process, workers are paid wages representing only a fraction of the wealth they produce. The bulk of this wealth is surplus value appropriated by the capitalists; this is the basis of profits and capital accumulation. Thus the dominant capitalist class becomes rich not through their own labor but through the appropriation of wealth produced by laborers. In this sense, capitalism is similar to slavery and feudalism.

Even in the United States and other advanced capitalist societies, the current mode of production results in a significant amount of poverty, even more widespread economic insecurity, and glaring social inequalities. The so-called American Dream has always been an illusion for most workers, and this continues to be the case today. The overwhelming majority of people in our country earn far less than what the federal government admits is necessary for a comfortable standard of living. Although automobiles, consumer electronics, household appliances, and designer clothing flood the market, decent jobs, adequate housing, affordable health care, good schools, secure retirement income, and safe neighborhoods are in short supply. The remarkable advances in technology today are being used to eliminate jobs and increase capitalist profits, not improve the living standards of the people.

The control of most economic enterprises and most of the nation’s wealth enables the capitalist class to dominate most of our major social institutions. Most of the mass media, publishing houses, the entertainment industry, and even sports teams are, in fact, capitalist businesses which exist to make profits for their owners. In addition, most non-profit public institutions, such as schools, colleges, and cultural organizations are undemocratically
controlled by representatives from the capitalist class. It is no surprise that most economic and social institutions follow the dictate that ‘What’s good for business is good for America.’ But the results for the working class majority are catastrophic.

Although business owners, politicians, and most journalists describe our political system as democratic, nothing could be further from the truth. The U.S. Constitution was developed by slave owners and capitalists to safeguard their economic interests and prevent any meaningful challenges to their wealth and power from the masses of people. To be sure, there has been some significant progress made during the last two centuries. But it is essential to recognize that the empowerment of women and people of color, the recognition of some workers’ rights, and the development of some social protections have been achieved only through decades of mass political protest and the disruption of ‘business as usual’ by the oppressed. Even today, regular elections and universal voting rights are inherently unable to provide real democracy because the government, both major political parties, and most politicians are dominated by the capitalist class.

We are convinced that we must abolish capitalism if we are to bring about a genuinely democratic society. In such a society, the working class majority would democratically and cooperatively control economic enterprises, develop national economic planning based on the needs and aspirations of the population as a whole, and end the traditional imperialist exploitation of other countries by the U.S. In such a society, the working class majority would democratically and cooperatively exercise political power through a new socialist government. A workers’ government would be based on direct popular participation in decision-making where possible and delegation of authority to accountable representatives where necessary. A new socialist constitution would provide the legal framework for the empowerment of the working class majority in the economy, politics, and society as a whole. This constitution would protect the freedom of all individuals, organizations, and political parties, except for those which support violent counter-revolution or fascism.

We recognize that the historical experiences of twentieth-century socialism do not provide models for us. We acknowledge that the socialist regimes in the former Soviet Union, China, and other countries did a great deal to eliminate exploitation, poverty, economic insecurity, and cultural backwardness. But we are also aware that most of these regimes suffered from authoritarianism and bureaucracy, and that they failed to develop genuine workers’ democracies. In our view, these unfortunate developments were partly caused by Western capitalist invasions, sabotage, and subversion, and partly caused by grievous errors made by the revolutionaries themselves. In the long run, these developments led to the downfall of most socialist regimes. However, like Marxists and socialists all over the world, we can learn from both the achievements and the mistakes made by the ‘first wave’ of socialist revolutions. We are convinced that the lessons to be learned from twentieth-century socialism can help us develop a theory and practice of socialism which places workers’ democracy, internationalism, and socialist morality at the heart of the radical project.

As the nucleus of a pre-party formation, we know that the first step in recruiting and retaining new members must be radical political education. We are especially concerned with helping working class people overcome bourgeois ideology, anti-worker views, national chauvinism, racism, and sexism. However, we are not a ‘talk shop’ of armchair radicals. We will join other workers in ongoing struggles for better wages and working conditions, affordable health care, adequate housing, and good schools. We will strongly support ongoing struggles to end racial and gender discrimination, police brutality, the imprisonment of political activists, and U.S. imperialism. As we do so, we will retain the right of independent political action while we strive to unite as many people as possible in support of the most advanced political orientation.

However, our fundamental strategic objective will be to grow into a large, multi- racial working class organization of women and men which can become a revolutionary and democratic socialist political party in the years ahead. Both in conducting outreach activities for our collective and in supporting other workers’ struggles, our paramount priority must be the recruitment and retention of new socialists. We pledge to do all that we can, collectively and individually, to support each other in everyday life. We pledge to work together democratically and cooperatively in order to serve as a model of the socialism we envision. We pledge to take significant special measures to end national oppression, racism, and sexism. We pledge to oppose all forms of chauvinism. Finally, we pledge to make the struggle for socialism a central part of our lives and show our brother and sister workers that there is reason for hope amid the oppression of contemporary capitalism.